informis
/
textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido0934.nws

1475 lines
65 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

F I D O N E W S -- | Vol. 9 No. 34 (24 August 1992)
The newsletter of the |
FidoNet BBS community | Published by:
_ |
/ \ | "FidoNews" BBS
/|oo \ | (415)-863-2739
(_| /_) | FidoNet 1:1/1
_`@/_ \ _ | Internet:
| | \ \\ | fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org
| (*) | \ )) |
|__U__| / \// | Editors:
_//|| _\ / | Tom Jennings
(_/(_|(____/ | Tim Pozar
(jm) |
|
| Newspapers should have no friends.
| -- JOSEPH PULITZER
----------------------------+---------------------------------------
Published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet international
amateur network. Copyright 1992, Fido Software. All rights reserved.
Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes
only. For use in other circumstances, please contact FidoNews.
Electronic Price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . free!
Paper price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10.00US
For more information about FidoNews refer to the end of this file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ..................................................... 1
Editorial: The war years ...................................... 1
2. ARTICLES ...................................................... 5
Calling direct to Russia - some technicalities ................ 5
Zone 2 would-be dictators ..................................... 6
"What happened in Zone 4 this year?" .......................... 9
Policy - Time For A Change .................................... 11
Schematic FIDONET ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION ................... 12
MORE ABOUT THE UNNEEDED RCS ................................... 17
Privacy from phone solicitors ................................. 19
Filebone - Some Information about the, ........................ 23
WHY HAS MY COMPUTER BEEN ORPHANED? ............................ 24
3. FIDONEWS INFORMATION .......................................... 26
FidoNews 9-34 Page 1 24 Aug 1992
======================================================================
EDITORIAL
======================================================================
Editorial: The war years
by Tom Jennings (1:1/1)
This editorial is in two parts. Both are contentious and angry. The
first is an item that keeps coming up in the current war in Zone 2.
The other relates directly to the process we think of as "FidoNews".
This is the WAR ISSUE of FidoNews. Or maybe it should be the HUMOR
ISSUE. Oh wait, that was a few weeks back.
* * * * *
Once upon a time, there was POLICY 1, circa 1985. I believe Thom
Henderson wrote a lot of it, and it was mainly a record of currently
accepted policies, ie. how you apply for a node number, net mail hour
(now called ZMH), that sort of thing. It worked for a long time and
only became obsoleted as we grew in complexity. It was Good.
This original "policy" grew and grew. I don't have copies of the old
ones (I'd love to though) and somehow culminating into the monstrosity
of POLICY4, which is not a policy, but an attempt at law, related to
POLICY 1 only in name. It stinks.
Has anyone actually tried to read it?! It's so bulky and contrived
-- quoting POLICY4 makes a fine weapon for putting your opponent on
the defensive.
One idiot in Germany, justifying the expulsion of a gay sysop on
purely hateful personal reasons, actually quoted section and paragraph
THAT IS NOT IN THE DOCUMENT and NO ONE NOTICED!!!
Here are some more reasons why POLICY4 should be disregarded, and
anyone who attempts to use it upon you should be looked at with
suspicion:
o It has the ZC (a completely non-functional post) appoint RCs as a
sort of governor of networks and NCs.
o It imposes the RC hierarchy upon FidoNet where none existed before.
o It has the RCs appoint NCs!
o It imposes the amusing concept that only the RCs (appointed by the
ZC) as the only people who can get rid of the ZC!
o It mandates message *content* -- stating no encryption allowed
FidoNews 9-34 Page 2 24 Aug 1992
(and by implication, the right of *Cs to examine message contents).
This alone is flatly illegal in many countries, including the U.S.
o No one had the NERVE to sign it!
It does however contain what was the original and good intent of the
"policy" documents -- it outlines existing practice regarding getting
a node number, etc.
POLICY4 is available from the FidoNews BBS via the usual methods
(download, Wazoo filerequest) as file POLICY4.ARC.
* * * * *
Many people have been trying to involve me into various flame wars
over out of control self appointed dictators in Zone 2. I have told
each one of them, on all "sides" to take me off their "CC" lists.
Since I was asked, what follows is the editorial part of my response.
It was written about a month ago.
RANT MODE ON:
For the past year or more, I've been getting rumblings and hints of
trouble emanating from FidoLand in zone 2. Things are not well there.
There are scoundrels attempting to force their tiny-minded moral
standards upon other peoples voluntary communication. I hear bits and
pieces. I get sent CCs of messages. I get huge files of bundled up
gigantic quoted messages. In the last few weeks, it's escalated to
daily batches of hundreds of lines of text from a dozen sources, from
many sides.
From this, as well as other second-hand sources both FidoNet and
voice, I get the sense of real troubles there. The things I've seen --
I think. How the hell can I tell? It's like trying to decode the Dead
Sea Scrolls. What passes for communications is pretty poor.
Yes, I am disgusted by the censorious bastards, but I'm also angry
with the self-described "innocent victims". I have a few questions to
ask, and a few complaints of my own.
The word "democracy" is a magical incantation used to ward off
bullying behavior in FidoNet. I'm not sure it's working though.
People forget that magic spells only focus energy; actual work must be
applied to solve problems. Clamoring for the self-appointed dictators
to "do something" is like asking lawyers, or the police, to
investigate themselves.
It is very revealing that so many of the "democracy!" callers run to
me, as the designer of FidoNet and all of existence, to throw a
thunderbolt or something and kill all the bad guys like in some movie.
What the hell do these people think "democracy" and
"self-determination" mean?! This is Complaint #1 of 2.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 3 24 Aug 1992
Complaint #2 of 2, far more disturbing: It would seem that we are all
completely helpless, in spite of our claim to be a COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK! Dammit, write!
FOR OVER A YEAR the censorious scumbags have been at work in Zone 2,
and NOT ONE PERSON has written up the story, as a story, written for
and comprehensible to non-participants. I bet most of zone 2 doesn't
even know what is going on! I know not everyone can write decent
prose, but if one tolerable writer cannot be found on a small
continent, I have one piece of advice: GIVE IT UP.
I was asked for my help. Here it is. I am not kidding.
o Offline-readers with VGA color screens and fancy text
manipulation toys like >quoting are not substitutes for WRITING.
"On Tuesday So and So said this to Mary:" followed by 20 quoted
lines with "I agree" as a reply is embarrassing to read. It merely
inflates the authors ego and ignores the readers plight, which is
to understand what the hell is going on. Use a TEXT EDITOR.
PRACTICE WRITING.
o I ACTUALLY RECEIVE "serious" messages with three-level deep
quotes! 200 plus line messages, with over 75% quotes from
previous messages! I am not kidding -- I delete this stuff without
reading it.
>>> You said I said you said this.
>> I said you said this.
> You said this.
I say this.
GIMME A BREAK!
Think about why people send captured and/or quoted messages to each
other: the messages generally unfold over a period of time, among the
participants. (Most if it being previous messages, quoted.) Because it
unfolds slowly, the participants can follow it, and can form in their
minds the picture or story it represents.
Now: Somehow they think that by packaging up a series of messages,
they'll be able to transmit this understanding-picture to other
people. Oh gimme a break! Most people can't read your mind! They
didn't experience those messages unfolding, and whatever went on
in between, such as your prior knowledge and experience with the
participants. WE ARE ALL SEPARATE PEOPLE WITH SEPARATE REALITIES. I
cannot see into your head. You need to WRITE THE STORY. It is HARD
WORK. IT IS STILL NECESSARY.
Most "CC'ing" is disgustingly smug self-reassurance of the importance
of ones own writings. It is safe to say any CC you get when people are
arguing is USELESS.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 4 24 Aug 1992
Stop transmitting MESSAGES to FidoNet nodes, and start writing STORIES
to the people who dwell in them, for them to read and understand.
Short is better; with exceptions, under one screenful. And that's
EXCEPTIONS!
Start treating FidoNet as a social organization that you ARE PART OF,
and you'll find you will stop being treated like an object for your
"managers" to "manage".
POLICY4 is an old crock of smelly shit. It is a weapon used to
intimidate the fearful and ignorant. It was written by damn fools,
ignore it. Maybe you like being cowered and fearful at work and at
home, but you don't have to put up with it in here.
We need to toss the useless power-mongering RC/ZC structure out on
it's collective ass. (I said structure not necessarily people -- many
are genuinely helpful people, but it is NOT the *C position that makes
them so; it is because they are helpful people in the first place.)
Before you non-RC/ZCs get too smug, get off YOUR lazy asses and do the
work you let them turn into your leash.
Maybe the moral fascists will now declare FidoNews obscene, and banish
it too from all of Europe. I'll probably never hear about it.
RANT MODE OFF
OK, so it's a bit self-serving. Maybe it will give you an idea of what
I get subjected to. At least half of it has direct application to
FidoNews and my editorship, which other than these self-indulgent
rants, is more properly called publishership. I don't write the news,
I publish it. This is as it should be.
190 lines long. Disgusting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 9-34 Page 5 24 Aug 1992
======================================================================
ARTICLES
======================================================================
From: Michael Bravo on 2:5030/2
What to consider when you wnat to call Russia direct
by Michael Bravo of Kronverk BBS, 2:5030/2@fidonet
Based on some experience gained during 2 years of sysoping here, I can
define the algorithm to create best link into Russia is as follows:
1) If you have USR Dual Standard or HST modem, then, by all means,
pick a HST node here and call it. You will get the best speed and
performance. If you find that throughput during 14400 connection is
not as big as you expected, try AT&N7 and AT&N6 modes - you're
probably losing on retrains. Here are the nodes who support HST for
today (as far as I know) :
Kronverk, 2:5030/2, +7-812-126-6972, USR DS (14400 one), CM
Kreit , 2:5030/1, +7-812-314-4131, USR DS (14400 one), *NOT* CM
Gold Zeppelin, 2:5030/6, +7-812-265-1496, USR DS (14400 one), CM
JVD1st BBS, 2:5020/6, +7-095-329-2192, USR DS (14400 one), CM
APS Software Node 2, 2:5050/3, +7-3412-221365, USR DS, CM
I also know of presence of HST modems at 2:5020/2 and 2:5020/51 , but
I'm not sure if they're on published numbers... contact them if you
wish. Also, don't depend on my words, look up the nodelist - several
others may show up. And oh yes - you can always route your mail to Reg
50 via 490/20 system - he is also HST/DS and CM and is the single most
reliable system I've ever seen.
And remember - if you can call with HST, please forget about
V32/V32bis.
2. If you have V32 or V32bis modem, then you've to consider the
possibility to call at 2400, IF you're calling popular node. The
reason is pretty weird - ex-soviet telephone lines have a misfeature
which looks like 'call waiting' but cannot be disabled. If someone
calls long distance while you're connected, you get loud 'click-peeep'
which instantly kills V32/V32bis in 75% of cases. HST can cope with
it, and good old V22bis too. The resume is - if you want to call at
V32/V32bis, pick some node here which is not extremely popular, that
is, doesn't have many LD calls usually.
3. If you have 2400 modem - then you're free in your choice, just
browse the nodelist.
/\/\ike
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 9-34 Page 6 24 Aug 1992
Zone 2 would-be dictators
by Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
Greetings there in Fidoland !
It has been a long time since I was actively involved in the politics
in fidonet. It has become necessarily to do so, just to be able to
stay in fidonet. As my name has been mentioned here with faint rumours
about what I was doing, going to do, was thinking or whatever, here is
a summary on the things that happen in region 28. Objective journalism
is very difficult when you are in the middle of a fight (and I call it
a fight alright), so this is how I see things. No doubt some here
will tell me and you I see it all wrong.
For the hundreds of sysops that do not know me, I have been the first
ZC in europe, coordinating and extending fidonet from a few nodes to a
network that covered all of western europe.
I need to go back in fidonet history for a short while because the
roots of many conflicts we see in zone 2, including the one in region
28 have roots in the past.
You must realize that in 1985 it was hardly possible for individuals
to have a mailer or a BBS. Both financially and technically. On the
technical side, I remember getting to the UK to get a prototype of the
first Hayes compatible modem that could dial out (at 300 baud that is,
the firm was Dataflex). On the financial side, the software came from
the usa, as did the small nodelists via the DECnet. Employees of DEC
on both sides of the ocean got the stuff manually over the pond. When
Rod Smallwood had to quit doing that I stepped in and could continue
because I had the backing of around 60000 people, forming the Hobby
computer club (HCC) in holland. Due to their funding we could get
software here, and we even got Tom Jennings and later Wynn Wagner to
europe so they could meet europeans and get an idea on what was going
on here. The very first net in holland was formed by the HCC that
bought the (Then very expensive) computers. The host (me) had the only
modem capable of dialing out then (wires were sticking out of it
everywhere).
In the mean time discussions were going on on how to maintain the
nodelist when fidonet would become bigger and bigger (we had visions
of people communicating not hampered by frontiers or government those
days. Boy did I get flames when I connected South Africa). Regions and
zones were invented as an aid for maintaining the nodelist. Ideas
about administrative voluntary functions as ZC and RC came up and
executed.
A big problem (costly and technically) was being in touch with the
RC's in the USA. As it is still the case, we europeans get the stuff
in the usa, not the other way around. Contacts with the RC1 conference
(echomail was so new then) were on and off. Very late in the process I
became aware that something like our policy 4 was being in the works.
I opposed to the way it was going to be and asked for a way to include
zone, region and net policies, so we would not have one for all policy
that had the USA situation as its base.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 7 24 Aug 1992
The HCC even paid my flight to the usa for a fidocon and after a
meeting with the RC's present, ZC3, and the IC david dodell we had an
agreement that we should go for a policy allowing 'sub' policies. The
zone policy should be as short as possible. (It costed us a good deal
of the night). I had already made a proposal that is very similar to
the current proposed world policy. Back in europe the IC let me know
that after reconsideration the RC's would not go for it and would put
the policy we now know in place. I really felt betrayed and told
europe that I would resign the first opportunity, eurocon. Being the
only candidate present, Ron Dwight was voted in there. I asked Ron to
carry on to get a democratic type of policy in place, or at least let
the zone and regions decide what was good for them. He agreed.
In the mean time BBSing was becoming payable for individuals. In
region 28 another club net was started and on my instigation a
regional covering network was founded so non members of the clubs
could join fidonet. So if you look at fidonet in region 28 today and
you want to join fidonet you have three choices: The regional net, and
one of the club nets if you are a member. The problems in holland were
on the costsharing side of echomail. If a number of people share
there money to get echomail should others be allowed to get it from
them for free ? Did they have a right to get it? The HCC paid the
transatlantic link for about a year and then gave up, it was too
costly. Some people with a lot of money took the load, but after a
while they had to give up. To make a long story short: we solved the
problem in region 28 in the beginning of this year by establishing one
central echomail hub where all nets connect. The hub would be paid for
by all participants. To solve the problem of all those hosts for
people outside region 28 we established one inbound gateway for the
region. Inner region netmail is exchanged directly between the hosts.
Back to Ron Dwight, the 2nd ZC2. After a discussion between Ron and
some sysop the sysop called Ron a liar. When Ron complained at the IC
he got an answer in the line: "this is something a ZC should be
prepared for and he should not easily be annoyed". Ron pulled the
plug, we had no ZC.
The third ZC2 was Felix Kaska, He also was voted in being very popular
because he imported free of charge the echomail from the usa. Felix
had to resign for personal reasons, but not after a clash with region
28 where he tried to reorganize the nets so the club nets would
disappear.
In came Ron Dwight again. He was all for democracy. He would not
follow policy to the letter. He said then. Nowadays he writes policy
with a capital P and declares it the Law. And he is after every region
that does not follow policy to the letter. Democracy : No. Flexible
interpretation of policy (what is in a word, why did we call it policy
and not Law back then eh ?): No. Thou Shall Reorganize. Not because
the region operates badly. Not because a sysop could not join fidonet,
but because the way some regions are organized is not following
policy. Especially region 28. But there were problems in region 30,
29, 25 and maybe a lot more. Boy, did we regret we voted for RD the
second time !
FidoNews 9-34 Page 8 24 Aug 1992
Not being able to find a sysop in region 28 that could do Ron's dirty
work Ron agreed with the then current (chosen) RC that the RC would
try to reorganize within a year. That was march.
10 days ago the dutch hosts found a message on our board from some
unknown dutch sysop telling us HE was the new RC and he demanded a
session password with our systems so the nodelist updates were
protected. Without consulting all of the NC's responded negative. A
few hours later we received a message from the ZC2 confirming that he
had replaced our RC.
Now, there is a lot more cooperation in region 28 than Ron and the
young guy (only being in fidonet a year as a point, not having
experience as hub or host) thought. Within one hectic hour of voice
telephone calls (we had each other numbers of course) we agreed fully.
We RC, REC and NC's would not accept this replacement coup. On behalf
of the group I wrote a message to the young guy explaining that he
would not get any support of the *C's of region 28 and that he surely
would recognize that he could not operate this way. We gave him 24
hours to reconsider. The response was that we would be thrown out of
the nodelist if we would not cooperate. I called him voice. Explained
how we were operating fidonet in the region. He responded that he
would withdraw if he 'got something out of it'. When I asked 'what' he
told me he should have a 'position' in fidonet after all the trouble
he went through. I told him that he was lucky that we would allow him
his nodenumber if he withdrew.
24 hours later most of us had been 'thrown out of the nodelist',
including some sysops the guy had a personal problem with. At least
one host had been removed he told us. After another round of
consulting our reaction was very clear. A complaint was filed about
Frank (the would be RC 28) and honored within 5 minutes by his
nethost. His actions were endangering the operation of fidonet in
region 28 and for us were extremely annoying. The punishment was a
three month removal from fidonet. We told him he could complain by the
only RC we recognized, the one that has been voted in. We also
password protected our links with our current RC28 so no games could
be played by sending us nodelist updates we did not want. We informed
all of our nodes and advised them to do the same and to NOT
automatically process the next nodelist.
The same day we sent a message to our ZC stating that:
1. We would not accept a removal from our RC without any consulting.
2. We refuse to reorganize the region just because a ZC tells us to.
3. His actions were endangering the operation of fidonet because
people wanting to communicate with us would not be able to do so
when the nodelist was not updated or even totally changed (we should
all get a new nodenumber and a number of systems were 'thrown out
of the list'. We would consider a complaint at the IC.
4. We would continue to send our nodelist updates to the only RC we
FidoNews 9-34 Page 9 24 Aug 1992
recognize
5. We wondered how he of all people could have chosen Frank, someone
totally incapable of being a RC.
Up to now polls of our sysops have shown us that we have more than 90%
of them behind us. As usual the fighting has become dirty, on both
sides. Frank (the fake RC28) promised to reorganize everything, mail
and echomail. In response we announced that the regional costsharing
system was only available for systems in the regional nodelist
published by our RC and that sysops that would like to be on RD's and
Franks side should get their echomail from them. There should be no
problem because the 'new RC' promised to get the echomail in. And we
would be crazy to pay for people that wanted us to be excommunicated.
Are you still with me ? Amazing !
The latest stand is that we jointly have set up a system that
generates a zonelist, zone update, world list and world list update
exactly the same as the one the ZC publishes, but with the correct
region 28 included. Starting next week we will even provide a diff
that revert this and will get us back on the ZC generated stream
without having to turn to getting a full nodelist. Also region 28
lists and diffs are available and are being sent to everybody that
communicates with the region.
How will this go further ? Actually I have no idea. Region 28 will
stand united against interference with our inner region workings. We
will spread our diffs to everyone that asks for them. We hope other
regions will join us. Sending your updates to region 28 as well as to
the ZC should certainly make a point. Many of us have thought about
leaving fidonet as a region completely. We decided to stay in fidonet
and fight for the better of the worse. We have a tradition of fighting
against anyone outside our country that would tell us what to do. In
the past it has sometimes taken 80 years, sometimes 5 years to win and
often we have gotten the needed help from our friends. If YOU want to
help us in this, let us know.
Henk Wevers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"What happened in Zone 4 this year?"
From: Pablo Kleinman on 1:102/631
During my time as coordinator of FidoNet in Latin America, I was real
careful to slowly establish a democratic system in the zone. At the
beginning, I thought it was the way the network was everywhere. As I
found out about the radical differences, I still decided to keep going
the same way.
All the coordinators in Zone 4 were elected by one vote per sysop
within the area they served. Sysops could impeach, although it never
occurred. Coordinators normally discussed with their area's sysops
before taking an action, and I normally briefed the entire zone about
my actions as ZC once every week or two, through public echomail. When
the former Region 1:60 became Zone 4, we held elections and I was
FidoNews 9-34 Page 10 24 Aug 1992
voted in by the sysops too.
When I decided to step down, early in 1991, I got permission from the
RCs to do things as usual, that is, elect the ZC by one vote per sysop
instead of following P4. 19-year-old Gustavo Zacarias, a FidoNet sysop
since age 15 with a techie-talk-no-shit reputation and a democratic
pledge was voted in. I was happy, and most others seemed to be too.
Last April, for reasons not completely clear yet, Gustavo decided to
make radical changes to his general attitude towards his job and those
that voted him in. One wild night in late April, the unimaginable
thing happened: Gustavo removed his region's RC (Billy Coen) and his
just elected NC (Cristian Jonas), taking over both positions,
apparently, because he disagreed with the NC's will to reorganize the
city hubs and the RC's refusal to remove him.
Two or three days later, the other 3 RCs in the zone sent Gustavo a
veto statement, requiring him to restore Billy Coen as RC. Gustavo
ignored the message and made arbitrary changes (like renaming "Billy"
to "Guillermo" [Spanish for William]) in the nodelist; he even changed
net structures, fucking up the entire routing system.
The RCs then, after procuring majoritarian support from their region's
sysops, staged what could be considered a coup. Gamey Garcia from
Mexico, was voted in. A P4 impeachment process was then started, but
Gustavo voluntarily resigned before it went through.
--- end ---
No, I hate it. I find it stupid, repulsive, immature, disgusting. But
I'm glad that the attempt to Policy4-ize Zone 4 didn't work out. It
also convinces me once more that until we get rid of it, we'll keep on
having this kind of problems, like Zone 2 is now proving.
I'm no politician. But I grew up under the boots of a bunch of fascist
generals, and terrorized by the vice principal's whistle blow when we
were too noisy in the cafeteria or when I ate an orange without using
fork and knife. I was brainwashed with fascist propaganda by my
teacher in 3rd grade, while the commies were blowing up the front of
my family's house with a bomb one night. I was victimized by
anti-semites when I was just too young to understand what being a Jew
was. I guess that at some point it just became sickening.
People I know "disappeared" for simply speaking their minds. The worst
that could happen to me is being "disappeared" from the nodelist. I
hate this authoritarian bigots and I'm not willing to deal with the
feeling of being "submitted." I guess it'll be just way too hard for
me to shut up.
Cheers,
FidoNews 9-34 Page 11 24 Aug 1992
-Pablo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
by Denis McMahon, 2:251/20
Policy - Time For A Change
==========================
A sysop recently wrote concerning the imposition upon Region25 of a
non-elected RC by ZC2. Whilst I don't like this, I accept that it
was done fully in accordance with policy. Policy currently denies
the nodes at the ground level any real say in who holds what post,
either directly or indirectly. This is undemocratic, and in my
opinion, policy needs to change.
Policy currently makes provision for the election of a ZC by the RCs
below him, and election of the IC by the ZCs. Why not, I ask, extend
this so that the RC is elected by the NCs, and the NC by the nodes.
I do not suggest that the RC be elected by the ground level nodes in
the region, as the administration of such a process is difficult,
and history has shown that there are problems with this process.
However, in a changing world where many countries have only recently
been able to hold democratic elections after a prolonged period of
dictatorship or oppression, I feel that FidoNet should be able to
show itself to be a democratic organisation.
The exact procedures for holding an election at any level should be
suggested by higher level documents, nut the lowest level document
should ultimately be able to over-ride this. Thus, although higher
level documents may suggest that an NC is chosen by a simple
majority, or that an RC is chosen by the NCs, the network or
regional policies respectively should be able to state that the NC
is chosen by a transferable vote scheme, or the RC is chosen by a
vote of all nodes in the region.
I have other gripes with policy. One is the Geographic Network
principle. I accept that, in areas where local calls are free, or
they are at a fixed cost regardless of length, the Geographic
Network concept, with all mail transfers being carried out as a
local call, is a good idea. It reduces the cost to all involved.
However, there are many parts of the world where local calls are not
free, nor of unlimited duration for a fixed charge. In these areas,
other factors may combine which make the geographic arrangement of
networks less appealing. Therefore, I suggest that the parts of
policy dealing with the geographic organisation of networks should
become reccomendations, the organisation of networks within a region
being decided at the region level.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 12 24 Aug 1992
Policy 4 currently makes little reference to Echomail, or to Files
Distribution. However, these activities, by volume, make up the
major portion of network traffic, and for many Sysops the main
interest in FidoNet is the echomail. Surely it is time that policy
recognised this, and that at the very least Policy and Echopol were
brought together in a single document.
It is suggested in Policy 4 that local documents should be raised at
the Zone, Region, Network and even System level. It also appears
from Policy 4 that the only change that such local policies may make
is the implementation of localised mail periods. I believe as stated
above that such local policies should also be able to define, for
example, the method of selecting the *C, *EC etc at that level. I
also believe that, in the case of conflict, the most local policy
should apply.
Obviously there are matters that affect the transfer of mail across
zone boundaries, and without re-writing the nodelist specifications
and a lot of software, the nodelist format and the administrative
structure of the *Cs must stay as it is. These matters can still be
addressed in a "World" level policy, and it can be written such that
it applies to lower levels when no local policy exists. If a region
wished to implement a local policy that required election of all *C
posts in the region, up to RC level, and stated that strict
geographical alignment of networks was not obligatory, then that
policy should be acceptable for the region concerned.
Additionally, the whole process of administration of policy changes
needs to be looked at. Under the current policy, this is only
possible if a majority of the RCs request a vote on an amendment.
This makes policy changes a long and laborious process, even for
minor changes. By delegating more of the authority for policy to
Zones, Regions and Nets, it permits the administration of changes to
allow for different local conditions to be handled at the
appropriate level. This allows for both a faster evolution of policy
to take in to account changes in local conditions, and removes the
common complaint that "We're stuck with this because it suits
everyone else."
These are only my thoughts, they are not intended to be an attack,
either directly or indirectly, against anyone, but are intended to
stimulate discussion of the changes appropriate for policy. I
suggest that the best people to discuss these thoughts would be the
ZCs and the IC, along with the ZECs and possibly also files
coordinators, the coordinators of the various files networks should
try and get together anyway - there are so many different files
networks springing up that I have trouble keeping track of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tom Jennings, 1:125/111
FidoNews 9-34 Page 13 24 Aug 1992
Yes, in some ways this is "yet anothre policy proposal", but I'm not
really pushing to make them official. It is only meant to show what I
think is possible, and a far more viable direction than some goddamn
piece of legalese boilerplate that would-be bureaucrats want to foist
upon us.
This thing's main feature is that it is SHORT and UNDERSTANDABLE. It
purposely does NOT cover operational details. It covers only things
that seemed to me (me, not "Everyone") to be the things of
international interest outside of operational details.
Think of it as a schematic. I also apologize for it's length. I
really tried to make it less than 66 lines, one American A-size page.
You will note that it does not even mention ZCs. I can think of no
useful function a ZC does, as far as sysops rights and such goes.
I've been working on this thing for about a year. There are some
notes-to-myself before the actual text begins.
-------------------------------------
NOTES:
The vote process requiring 2/3rds "yes" kinda forces sysop
participation, or if no one cares (low voter turnout), expediency.
IMCOMPLETE AREAS:
--- Commercialism: how to word. "Prohibited" is too strong and
impossible. "Purely commercial"? "Strongly discouraged"?
--- I'd really like to define "overthrow". It would mean putting
nodelist generation details in here. Yuck. How's this:
OVERTHROW:
Since a net or region determines who it's /0 is, it gets to say "Joe
Schmoe is now our host, signed, <n> sysops" everyone would be required
to honor the change.
Stability is the norm because of the coordinated effort required to
get <n> sysops in a net or region to agree to anything; the more
overwhelmingly painful the problem, the more easily concensus will be
reached.
----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONET ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION
FidoNews 9-34 Page 14 24 Aug 1992
PURPOSE:
The purpose of FidoNet is unimpeded communication between individuals.
No person or group has any more or less right to communicate than any
other. No one moral or ethical code has precedence over any other.
When conflicts arise, weight shall be given to solutions that favor
freer, broader or expanded communications. Justice takes precedence
over expediency.
INFORMAL GUIDELINES:
o No person shall impede the flow of traffic.
o Reading other peoples' mail is extremely rude.
o Tampering with mail for any reason is the most serious breach
possible.
o Meddling that affects the operation of another members system is
only slightly less awful.
o Thou shalt not annoy.
o Thou shalt not be easily annoyed.
DEFINITIONS:
FidoNet addressing is logically heirarchical: zone, net, node, and
point. (Points are treated as human callers and therefore are not
otherwise part of FidoNet.) Zone:net/node.point addressing heirarchy
in no way implies a social or organizational heirarchy, beyond
net/region host responsibilities, defined below.
A NODE is the atomic component of FidoNet. It is capable of receiving
FidoNet mail as defined in applicable protocol documents, within the
requirements in this document.
A NET is an autonomous cluster of nodes within a limited geographical
area. Criteria for forming nets include: host-routing of mail for
inter-node effeciency and better sysop relations. It is generally
desirable for nodes to be part of nets.
A REGION is an arbitrary physical area for the sole purpose of
providing a logical "net/node" address for nodes not within a net. A
region host performs for netless nodes the same function as a net
host, except they are not required to forward mail to nodes within
their region. Region hosts have traditionally taken on other FidoNet
responsibilities, such as compiling the nodelist, though this is not
part of the definition of Region Host.
REGION and NET hosts are otherwise equivelant, and are called HOSTS in
this document.
A ZONE is a generally-large physical area designed to handle the
realities of global, inter-national FidoNet networking, including:
alien telcos and protocols, disparate time schedules; and to increase
network autonomy.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 15 24 Aug 1992
Zone, net, region and node numbers are positive integers, starting
with 1. 0 is a "magic value", and designates the "host" for that
level; net/0 is NET HOST (aka Net Coordinator, NC), region/0 is REGION
HOST (aka Region Coordinator, RC), and zone/0 (zone/0:0) is ZONE HOST
(aka Zone Coordinator, ZC).
Each zone shall designate one hour per day as "Zone Mail Hour", or
ZMH, during which all members' systems shall be technically able to
receive incoming FidoNet mail and files. Though it is not required to
be "FidoNet only" during ZMH, the intent is to allow the receipt of
otherwise-unscheduled mail from any other FidoNet node. Please refer
to SYSOP RESPONSIBILITIES.
SYSOPS RIGHTS
Sysops have the right to choose their host via popular vote.
A candidate is considered "elected" when s/he receives 2/3rds of the
votes counted. If no candidate receives 2/3rds of the votes, elections
must be repeated until a candidate receives 2/3rds of the counted
votes. This explicitly allows for "none of the above", forcing new
candidates to be found, as opposed to merely choosing "the lesser of N
evils". Fairness and justice should prevail over efficiency or
convenience; lives will not be lost in the meantime.
Each net/region shall determine the length of an elected persons term.
Under no circumstances shall it be more than one year.
The voting method chosen must be auditable and verifyable, such that
each net member can verify that their vote was recorded as intended.
Voting parameters (term duration, voting method, etc) shall not be
changed by an elected person.
Net "membership" shall be determined by an having an entry in the
nodelist for at two least previous and sequential revisions of the
list. Each individual human sysop, one per physical node maximum, is
granted one vote each.
A vote can be called at any time 1/2 of the members declare it.
This enumeration of rights in no way denies or limits any other rights
sysops have.
RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS
Each net/region has three main tasks:
1. Maintain their nodelist fragment.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 16 24 Aug 1992
2. For nets only, route incoming mail for nodes within the net.
3. Help new sysops get "online".
Each net/region has a 0th node, the "host". By definition, net hosts
are required to accept mail for all nodes within that net, and arrange
for that mail to be received by the addressed node, with emphasis put
upon lowest cost. Net and region hosts act as an informal "clearing
house" for information regarding that net or region. It is up to the
net or region how it handles all other tasks.
No node shall interfere with the flow of mail traffic in their net,
regardless of content. (Carrier status.) Illegalities are to be
handled by the legal system(s) applicable in your area. Morality and
ethics are exclusively the realm of the communicating part(y)(ies).
Each member is responsible for paying any expenses involved in their
own mail delivery.
If a net host would incur expense in delivering mail to other members
of their net, then arrangement may be made for member(s) to receive
their mail at their own expense (note that expense-incurring
distribution of mail within a net is sometimes at odds with the
intended definition of a "net", though sysops may in general organize
in any fashion that pleases them but meets the other mimimum
requirements.)
Each member is responsible for maintaining an "operable" system, the
parameters of which are to be determined by each net, with the
exception of TECHNICAL ISSUES mentioned earlier. If a member cannot be
contacted via FidoNet for an extended period of time, s/he may be
dropped from the net.
"Bombing runs" are highly discouraged -- generating large number of
messages that clog the net. If you must "bomb" all nodes within a net,
you are required to deliver each message individually, and not use
host routing. (And take responsibility for the result.)
EXCOMMUNICATION (ie. the Death Penalty)
A member shall be removed from the net/region without that member
sysops' consent only by the following process, which emphasizes
fairness, process and justice over expediency:
Three attempts are made to reach consensus within the group. Consensus
means: no member (except the person in question) of the net/region
blocks (objects) to the removal of the person. Any single member
objecting prevents the removal. It is acceptable to stand aside (ie.
no opinion).
If consensus fails three times, at least 48 hours apart, a popular
vote may taken. If 7/8ths of the voting members agree, the member may
be removed from the net.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 17 24 Aug 1992
Excommunication shall be for no longer than one month the first time;
three months the second time; six months for each additional
excommunication.
The member in question is to be informed that an excommunication is
under way. Once the member in question is informed, all
excommunication processes and communications are to be made public.
--- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pablo Kleinman
1:102/631
--- MORE ABOUT THE UNNEEDED RCS ---
This is a follow-up on the article I submitted last week, in which
I protested Tom's proposal to create even more regions in Zone 1.
There was an editorial reply to my article, but it did not cover
the questions presented.
There I go again, trying to get the answers; sorry for the use of
"reply text" format in parts of the article. The quoted text is
from Tom Jennings' little note at the end of my article last week.
Hopefully this week he'll write a better one. :)
> Basically Pablo -- there is not a conspiracy under every rock.
Tom, I did not say there was a "conspiracy under every rock," and
don't seem to have suggested that. However, I have quite an extensive
experience in dealing with region coordinators, including those in
Zone 1, which is what prompted me to write the article on the first
place. The Region Coordinators play political games. They do even get
into playing them in an organized way, like I saw a couple of times
when invited to join the Zone 1 RC's weekly teleconference on an 800
number. They perform no function of technical value to the network,
other that forwarding the nodelist changes from the NCs to the ZC.
When the IFNA referendum was held, they acted with complete
coordination to make it fail. I did not complain about that, since I
also opposed IFNA's bid, but the "Banana Republic tactics" I heard
discussed really left an impression on me. Not a good one. I look
forward to an "organized" reply to this article as well on their
behalf. Let's see...
> I would like to see RCs become what they were intended to be --
> *exactly* equivelant to NCs, no more, no less. To do all of the
> functions an NC does *except* route incoming netmail. That was
> all I ever intended.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 18 24 Aug 1992
Sure, but as long as we have Policy4, your proposal is not viable.
Moreover, the RCs in Zone 1 were the main group involved in Policy4's
drafting, and gave themselves a virtual veto power on future policy
changes. This has been diminished by the growth of FidoNet elsewhere.
What you propose would give them back a veto power on policy
referendum decisions.
> In fact however no one *I* know is in a position to push some
> magic button and make them all go away.
I did not suggest you that they be eliminated. However, there is no
reason to have more. It won't help anyone. It won't benefit FidoNet in
any way.
> In fact also, as someone points out, the region
> encompassing El Paso TX (I simply don't remember the number) is
> actually over 1300 nodes, not "1000" like I guessed.
That doesn't mean anything. What does an RC do? Ask the sysops how
many of them know who their RC is and if they have ever seen a
message or exchanged one with him. Why is 1300 too much? Too much
for what?
> So acknowledging the actual, factual existence of RCs, the more
> the merrier. At the least it would be dilution of existing power
> from a handful to "many". Not quite the same as, or as desirable
> as, going from a handful to "lots!" ie. each net a sovereign
> entity as intended.
According to the current nodelist and policy organization, nets are
CONTAINED within regions. I can't see how your explanation would
fit in real -or at least current- terms.
Moreover, as long as RCs in Zone 1 are not elected, having a larger
structure of them only means giving an organized group of dictators
even more power to reject any future democratic changes to FidoNet
administration. That is not my idea of merrier, believe me.
> Just because I don't spout revolutionary rhetoric at every point
> doesn't mean I have "sold out to the enemy". The world is not
> black and white, and I won't be force-fit into anyone's "camp"
> no matter how righteous...
That has nothing to do with my article, Tom. I have only intended
to publicly state a rational opposition to this new proposal, and
yes, I showed my surprise about seeing it come from you.
I no longer seek your active participation in the movement to
democratize and decentralize the network's coordination, but as
long as I'm not completely fatigued from all this crap, I will
continue criticizing and actively opposing any new plan -even if it
comes from you- that would make a democratic FidoNet even more
unlikely in the future.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 19 24 Aug 1992
This is one: there is no need for new RCs in Zone 1; any move to
create more regions without first democratizing the coordinator
structure in this zone can only mean more political B.S. Having
more appointed RCs would only mean a larger number of dictators
within the net that will oppose any proposal for change that could
cut their grip on the network. I'm sure that most sysops will not
approve it, but... will they ever be given a chance to say
something?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Appel
A user on 1:231/30
PRIVACY FROM PHONE SOLICITORS
Many companies doing telemarketing have a computer file of phone
numbers of people who don't want to be solicited on the phone.
Reputable firms should have a "do not solicit" field in their
customer/donor database. But, some lazy companies and fund-
raisers do not. The following letter is for those who do not, or
to make sure they flag your record as "do not solicit" if that is
your desire.
The following is a sample letter you can write to companies if
you want them to stop calling you on the phone. It works for
both sales calls and organizations calling for donations. It is
*not* intended for bill collectors, creditors, or others to whom
you may be legally indebted.
I am not a lawyer. Although the following procedures are most
likely legal in your state, I cannot guarantee that they are.
However, a letter similar to this one, but much nastier, worked
in getting one organization to stop calling me with requests for
donations. Others have also used this method to stop unwanted
phone calls from sales or charitable organizations.
If you still receive a call after sending this letter, and the
organization won't pay your $100 bill, you might be able to take
the organization to small claims court in order to collect. Once
they know you are willing to go to small claims court, most
companies would rather pay the $100 than suffer the hassle of
going to court.
You could also turn the tables by assigning the invoice to a
collection agency for 50%.
SENDING THE LETTER OF NOTICE:
1. Substitute proper information for the items in parentheses.
a. your name and address.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 20 24 Aug 1992
b. the date.
c. the organization or company name and address.
d. replace the "(____)" in the body of the letter with the
organization/company name in both places.
e. replace the "(###-###-####)" with your phone number.
f. replace the (Your name) at the end with your name.
Be sure to have your name printed, AND signed.
2. Print the letter with a letter-quality (LQ) or near-letter-
quality (NLQ) font on your printer. If your printer doesn't
do LQ or NLQ, then use a typewriter.
3. Print or photocopy several extra copies and keep them on file.
4. Mail the letter.
5. Write, by hand, the date that you mailed it on your file
copies.
6. Keep a handy list of the companies to whom you sent the
letter.
IF THE COMPANY/ORGANIZATION CALLS YOU AFTER YOU SEND NOTICE:
1. If the company calls you on the phone, IMMEDIATELY write down
the date and time on note paper. Ask the solicitor to hold
while you get pen and paper. Don't be afraid to interrupt
them, just say "hold on please."
2. Write down the company name, and ask the solicitor for his/her
full name, and write it down. Ask the solicitor for his/her
supervisor's name, and write it down too. Do not let the
solicitor continue until you have their full name and the name
of their supervisor.
3. Inform the solicitor that you had previously sent his/her
company/organization written notice that any phone calls
placed from his company to your phone number would constitute
agreement to be billed for your time. Tell him/her that this
phone call has now activated the agreement, and they will be
billed $100/hour with a 1 hour minimum.
4. Tell the solicitor that whether he/she hangs up now or
continues to speak, their company will be billed either way.
If the solicitor still wants to speak, you must listen in
order to justify sending them the bill. Just remember, you
stand a good chance to collect $100. However, if the solicitor
hangs up on their own accord, you can still bill them. But
once you have informed them that the agreement has been
activated, you must allow them to continue talking if they
want.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 21 24 Aug 1992
5. As the person speaks, take notes about what they say. Write
down what they are trying to sell you, or what they are trying
to raise money for. This will serve as evidence that they
called you. When the call is over write down the time again.
6. Now you can prepare an invoice. Be sure to include the date
and time of the call, along with the name of the person who
called you, and a brief description of what they talked about.
Send it to the company to the attention of "Accounts Payable."
Include a photocopy of your original notice along with the
invoice. A sample invoice follows the sample notice. Be sure
to replace the items in parentheses with the appropriate
information.
-------- sample notice ------ cut here -------------------
(Your name)
(Your Address)
(Your City, ST, ZIP)
(Month, Day Year)
(Company name)
(Company address)
(Company City, ST, ZIP)
Dear Sirs:
This communication is to give you notice that I will invoice
you for my time should you ever call me in the future. My charge
will be $100 per hour with a 1 hour minimum billing. If you, or
anyone in the employ of (____), or anyone acting on your behalf,
or on behalf of (____), ever telephones me in the future, said
telephone call will: constitute acceptance of these terms, and
constitute an agreement to pay my invoice for taking your call.
Such acceptance on your part, as indicated by such a telephone
call will take precedence over any written communication
declining such acceptance. Bills will be due within 15 days of
any such call. The phone number to which this notice applies is:
(###-###-####)
This billing arrangement is legal and has been tested in
court. If you doubt this please refer to the "People" column on
page A-2 of the October 22, 1991 edition of the Indianapolis
(Indiana) Star newspaper.
I sincerely hope that you will find a way to accommodate
those persons who do not wish to receive your telephone
solicitations.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 22 24 Aug 1992
Please remember that any phone call, no matter what the
purpose, will constitute your agreement to be billed and to pay
my bill. If you wish to communicate with me without being
invoiced, you may do so in writing.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
-------- sample invoice ------ cut here -------------------
(YOUR NAME) -------------
(YOUR ADDRESS) I N V O I C E (MONTH DAY YEAR)
(YOUR CITY, ST ZIP) -------------
(YOUR PHONE #)
Bill To: Terms: NET 15
(Company name)
(Company address)
(Company City, ST, ZIP)
Description Amount
-------------------------------------------- --------
phone communication on (Date of phone call) $100.00
at (Time of phone call)
with (Name of person who called you),
on the subject of (mention what they tried to sell
you or get you to donate money for).
$100/hour with 1 hour minimum.
Refer to previous billing agreement dated (Date of
original notice), copy enclosed.
------
TOTAL $100.00
------
###########################
THANK-YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS
###########################
------------------ end of sample invoice -------------------
Permission is given to print the above article in FidoNews, all
others must obtain permission from author.
Fidonet: 1:231/30
RIME: ->IBMNET
GEnie: DAVE.APPEL
Internet: Dave.Appel@f30.n231.z1.fidonet.org
[end]
FidoNews 9-34 Page 23 24 Aug 1992
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Filebone
A couple of years ago, those of us who enjoyed making file
echoes available had to make about four long distance calls to
pick up all of the various file echoes. Now, thanks to the
Filebone Project, this can all be done with just one call.
Less than a year ago, Erik vanRiper (PDN founder) proposed a
combined distribution scheme to help make various File
Distribution Networks (FDNs) more readily available. He called
it the Filebone. The main core of the Backbone quickly aided in
making this a reality. Back in the birth of the FILE_MOVERS
echo, John Souvestre, posted this message:
---
I see 3 "Stars" who carry everything that the Filebone has to
offer. These 3 Stars would form a triangle (each feeding both
of the others, depending on the seen-bys to prevent dupes). They
would connect with each other every few hours (except during 8am
- 5pm, Mon - Fri). As other Zones become active in the Filebone
the various Stars would form connections.
Each of these 3 Stars would feed up to 15 Hubs. These 45 Hubs
would be the real workhorses for the Filebone. They would
connect with one of the Stars at least twice every day. They
would have to be willing to carry any Filebone area requested by
someone that they feed.
The 45 Hubs would feed up to 10 Nodes each. That would allow
supplying a feed into each of the 311 Zone 1 Nets plus the
various FDN Heads who would also connect to the Hubs.
No "monster systems" are required or desired. They are too hard
to replace when there is a problem.
A file sent by a FDN Head to a Hub would be on all 45 of the
Hubs in under a day's time, on the average.
The Hubs would be free to feed anyone they cared to. Likewise,
a Node looking for a feed would be free to approach any of the
Hubs.
Kevin is going to include the list of Hubs in the weekly
Filebone.NA file so that Nodes looking for connections will know
who to turn to.
---
Today the Filebone is a reality and is working most excellently.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 24 24 Aug 1992
The FDNs currently carried by the Filebone are:
ADANet Ham Net SkyNet
Amiga Net IDC Net Southern CA
ANSIClub LanNet Scouting
Clipper Net MSDN (Macintosh) SoundNet
DeskTop Pub Net Novell Net TAG Net
GSDS (Genealogy) Programmers Net UtilNet
GeoWorks Net Remote Access WinNet
The Three Star Systems supporting the first tier of the Filebone
are: 1:13/13, 1:209/209 and 1:396/1.
The current Filebone Hubs are (all Zone 1):
12/12 115/989 141/455 278/707 377/37
100/375 116/29 147/7 278/709 387/255
102/531 120/116 170/610 280/46 388/5
105/72 120/364 209/720 282/62 2220/200
105/340 124/7009 231/120 289/13 2608/2
106/1555 125/37 232/16 347/18 3629/201
114/116 133/677 260/210 369/37 3802/213
114/150 138/148 271/248
Notes of interest:
- Filebone folks will be at FidoCon 1992 in Dallas, Tx
- Filebone Technical Coord is John Souvestre 1:396/1
- Filebone List Keeper is Kevin 1:116/29
- Filebone list, Filebone.NA, comes out weekly, hatched in the
BACKBONE file area, and is available at all Filebone sites
So if you'd like to link into some of FDNs on the Filebone, pick
up a current copy of Filebone.NA and contact a Filebone Hub for
a feed. Also please pick up any message areas which go with the
FDNs. It is recommended you pick up the information file listed
via file request from that FDN headquarters system.
It is all of us working together that make it happen.
Kevin Snively
FidoNet 1:116/29
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY HAS MY COMPUTER BEEN ORPHANED?
by Scott B. Laughlin
I'm a writer and in the middle of typing an important manuscript, my
trusty XT stumbled, gasped a series of BTs (in Morse code) and died.
The monitor remained dark and I could detect no preliminary memory
check on the initial power up.
FidoNews 9-34 Page 25 24 Aug 1992
Not well versed on the inwards of computers, I hauled the machine to a
local computer store and waited. Three days later an expert called. He
had substituted every board and card in the system, except for the
mother board, and his deductive conclusion was that the mother board
was defective. (Substituting boards? I can do that! And I'm paying
this guy $65 per hour?) There was more. My machine was obsolete! Junk!
It was necessary that I upgrade with a 286 mother board which would
render all of my plug-in boards, except for the modem, useless. I went
into a state of shock.
Yanking my attention back to reality, the repairman began explaining
the hideous details. It would be necessary to purchase two megabytes
of RAM, $80; a new mother board, $88; a new disk drive and controller,
$75 and $39, respectively; a new video card, $13; and labor, $65. The
man was asking me to spend $360 to repair a machine valued at about
$200.
Convinced that XT mother boards were available elsewhere. I paid the
diagnostic fee and took my machine home.
A bit of detective work turned up an affordable, XT mother board.
Bartering with some ham radio gear, I recruited a talented friend who
performed the installation. Today my XT is now up and running. The
cost, a mere fraction of what the expert had quoted.
Reliable sources for computer parts do exist outside the established
commercial franchises. If your old machine has been orphaned and
upgrading is not an affordable option, don't toss it in the garbage.
Instead, quiz your friends, haunt the computer fairs, and read
through the tiny ads in the back sections of computer magazines.
Small, home-operated businesses exist everywhere, offering a host of
surplus parts. With some luck and a bit of haggling you might get your
obsolete computer up and going, too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 9-34 Page 26 24 Aug 1992
======================================================================
FIDONEWS INFORMATION
======================================================================
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
Editors: Tom Jennings, Tim Pozar
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello
"FidoNews" BBS
FidoNet 1:1/1
Internet fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org
BBS (415)-863-2739 (2400 only until further notice!)
(Postal Service mailing address) (have patience)
FidoNews
c/o World Power Systems
Box 77731
San Francisco
CA 94107 USA
Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
copyright 1992 Tom Jennings. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
(we're easy).
OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
BACK ISSUES: Available from FidoNet nodes 1:102/138, 1:216/21,
1:125/1212, 1:107/519.1 (and probably others), via filerequest or
download (consult a recent nodelist for phone numbers).
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
FidoNet, please direct them to fidoinfo@fidoinfo.fidonet.org, not the
FidoNews BBS.
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/1 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC".
FidoNews 9-34 Page 27 24 Aug 1992
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings of Fido Software, Box 77731, San Francisco
CA 94107, USA and are used with permission.
Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".
-- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink